Horrorfest 2010: Vampyr

I had so much fun watching and writing about 31 horror movies in 31 days last October that I've decided to do it again. Last time I originally planned to just watch my favorites that I happened to have on hand, but that evolved into me watching a bunch of movies I had never seen before. There wasn't much rhyme or reason to it, though -- I mostly watched whatever happened to be available on Netflix via the watch instantly option, or whatever happened to be playing in town.

Anyway, this time I decided to look up a "100 best" list to work off of. I'd seen about half the movies on the list I settled on, so I'll be watching 31 of the other half of the list in no particular order. First up:

VAMPYR

I've heard of this flick before but never watched it until now. It's an old German/French co-production from 1932, directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer. I've seen at least one of his films before, THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC, which was kind of a horror story in and of itself, depicting the trial, torture and execution of Joan of Arc.

Going into the movie I assumed it was a silent film, but it turns out it's actually a very early sound film. So, it still relies heavily on a lot of silent techniques, like extensive use of title cards. But, atmospheric plays throughout and there is some sparse dialogue and a few sound effects here and there.

The movie is light on plot and heavy on atmosphere -- almost more of a stream of consciousness nightmare than an actual story with a beginning, middle and end. At the beginning we're told through narration that the main character, Allan Gray (Julian West), is a student of the occult and has been so entrenched learning about witch craft and devil worshippers that he sometimes can't even trust his own eyes anymore and can't always tell the difference between dream and reality. So, appropriately, much of the movie walks that fine line, too.

Gray is wandering through Europe, stops at a weird creepy inn, and becomes involved in a mystery that slowly unravels to reveal a local Vampyr sucking the blood of some locals while using other locals as slaves to help her in her crimes. The first half of the film is a lot of Gray wandering around abandoned buildings, witnessing strange sights -- a guy who appears to be a grim reaper taking a ferry across the river, shadows that seem to have minds of their own, bustling about. That kind of stuff. The second half deals more with the reality of the situation as Gray realizes he's dealing with a Vampyr and sets a plan in motion to destroy the monster and her accomplices.

The dream like, or, I guess, nightmarish quality of the film is actually heightened by the antiquated techniques the movie uses. For instance, the primitive sound recording techniques results in sparse sounds that seem kind of half heard -- characters speaking right in front of you seem to have voices that are coming from other rooms. Sound effects that are supposed to be coming from actions right in front of the viewer seem to echo from some other dimension. Old films like this often feel alien enough because times and technology have changed so much, but this one is even more alien than usual.

That said, VAMPYR also seemed startlingly modern in places. All you have to do is compare it to the much more famous Todd Browning verion of DRACULA starring Bela Lugosi to see what I mean. DRACULA is from 1931, VAMPYR was shot around the same time and released in 1932. Even though they're so close in age, there's a huge difference in style. Despite its classic status, DRACULA is somewhat infamous for being overly talky, lacking in atmosphere after the first few minutes, and unimaginatively shot in boring drawing rooms. VAMPYR, on the other hand, is full of energetic tracking shots that follow characters down hallways, into doorways, and around corners. VAMPYR also uses a lot of crazy angles and juxtaposes strange unexplained images in ways that would make Salvador Dali proud. There's even a coffin-eye-view shot of a funeral procession. VAMPYR is as much of an experimental art film as it is a horror one.

You always have to take movies as old as this one with a grain of salt. There's a disconnect between the film and a modern viewer that you're just going to have to accept and get over if you're going to give it a chance. It's only a little over an hour long, but that's a long drawn out hour and I'd be lying if I didn't admit I checked the clock more than once. Still, the movie is definitely creepy and definitely unique, and probably one of the best representations of a dream like state that I can remember seeing on screen.